VS 11+ project limitations on DVD ISO creation

russbecker · Post by **russbecker** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:24 pm

I have been a long time VS 8 user. Recently I purchased VS 11+ to use on a new PC ( Win XP x64, Intel975BX, Intel Q6600 2.4GHz, 4GB memory, 700Gb SATA disk). While editing individual projects has been a breeze, putting multiple projects into a DVD layout project has been a disaster. I have 14 projects to place in a DVD layout project; each project needs 4 chapter entries. So far VS 11 has been unable to do this; either I get an application crash when I try to exit the Create Disc module to save the project, or I get an application crash when I try to create an ISO image file.

What I would like to know is if there is an internal limitation to the number of projects/chapters in a DVD layout? Should I not use existing VS projects as components in a DVD layout? I might add I had no trouble carrying out this task using VS 8 on a much older and less capable machine.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:33 pm

What I would like to know is if there is an internal limitation to the number of projects/chapters in a DVD layout?

I know of no such limitation other than, I believe, a 99 chapter limit. I'm not sure if that's a per title limit or a per (overall) project limit.

Should I not use existing VS projects as components in a DVD layout?

So at the burn stage you are inserting VSPs into the burning timeline? You may want to try what we call the Suggested Workflow, which is to first render your VSPs to DVD-compatible MPEG-2 files. You then insert those into the burning timeline.

russbecker · Post by **russbecker** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:36 pm

That is exactly what I am in the middle of doing at the moment, but that is not the work flow that was needed in VS 8. It is more than a little aggravating that VS 11 cannot do what VS 8 can do.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:42 pm

Actually, that workflow was developed some years, and versions, ago to circumvent problems in the very intensive render/burn process and this workflow seems to solve many of them. Maybe you were just one of the lucky ones before.

Post by **Ken Berry** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:47 pm

In fact, much of the suggested workflow was developed around the time of version 8 precisely because, if anything, for many people VS8 was the buggiest version ever released. It had chronic out of sync problems and pervasive memory creep to name just two of its major problems. A lot of people found that it fell over when project files were used in the burning module, and it was also discovered that producing a DVD-compatible mpeg-2 of each project in the editor module worked most of the time for most people (though without smart render enabled, for those who also suffered out of sync problems with mpeg-2)!

The basic point is that various versions of VS seem to work poorly on certain computers and perfectly well on others. I am not sure what the problem is with your Quad -- I have one which is not dissimilar (see my System button) and it works perfectly well with multiple project files inserted in the burning module, and each with chapters created in it. This is not my normal practice, but I always test it on each new version of VS just to see how the program handles it on my successive computers...

Another of the things I usually say to people is that they need to keep an open mind, The objective is to get your project edited and burned to disc, and in that sense it is a little irrelevant which method you use to get there. At least you know that there are alternative workflows, each of which works better for some people than for others.

EDIT: Black Lab -- great minds evidently thinking alike again. I was writing mine while you were posting yours!! But at least we agree.

russbecker · Post by **russbecker** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:50 pm

I find it a little hard to believe that the suggested approach to DVD layout is not the approach on p113 of the VS 11 manual. If this is the case, then perhaps the manual needs some re-writing, or maybe I shouldn't read manuals and help files.

I never had VS 8 fail to render an ISO file when using multiple VS 8 projects.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:57 pm

EDIT: Black Lab -- great minds evidently thinking alike again. I was writing mine while you were posting yours!! But at least we agree.

Ken, I almost always agree with you, even if my initial answer was different from yours.

If this is the case, then perhaps the manual needs some re-writing, or maybe I shouldn't read manuals and help files.

It's always a good idea to read the manual. Following what it says is a different story.

As far as rewriting it goes, Corel does not recognize this as a bug, just an isolated problem, although I do recall something similar to the Suggested Workflow used to be listed as a fix on the website when the company was still Ulead. Don't know if it is still there.

Post by **Ken Berry** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:00 pm

The point Black Lab and I were trying to make was, sure, your workflow has worked in the past, as it did and does for a lot of people. And Ulead itself used to insist it was the way to go. But for many other users, it didn't work all the time or simply didn't work at all. Seemed to be a compatibility issue between whatever architecture and software configurations were on the particular computer they were using at the time. Shift to a new computer, with different set-up and it would work, or vice versa...

We are not saying that the suggested workflow is the only way to go. It is just an alternative workflow for those who find that their current one is not, or no longer, working on the computer they are currently using. That is all. And as I say, keep an open mind...

russbecker · Post by **russbecker** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:01 pm

Again, the question is what is the project count limitation? Up to about 4, it is fat, dumb, and happy. 7 is clearly too many to create an ISO image, while 14 won't allow you to even save the project.

I agree the idea is to get the job done. This particular job needs to be done by 5:30PM EST, and I am in the middle of re-doing it because of a feature that use to work.

The only saving grace is that the Q6600 renders NTSC DV video segments quickly.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:05 pm

As far as rewriting it goes, Corel does not recognize this as a bug, just an isolated problem, although I do recall something similar to the Suggested Workflow used to be listed as a fix on the website when the company was still Ulead. Don't know if it is still there.

Found it! On Ulead.com under VS>Support>Technical FAQs>VS9:

After successfully burning discs for a number of times, I get one of the following messages now when I try to burn: "Report ID 0x800411da (4570)" or, more frequently, "Convert step got some problems (4101)." What should I do?
Instead of burning the project directly to disc, create a DVD compliant video file first and save it on your hard drive. After creating the file, create a new project and go to Share > Create Disc then insert the newly saved video file. Open the Project Settings dialog box [ Alt + J ] and select Do not convert compliant MPEG files then click OK . Burn the project to disc.
Tip : Refrain from inserting Project files onto the Timeline in Create Disc.

So why isn't it in the manual?

Post by **Ron P.** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:18 pm

Why isn't in the manual?

1. Ulead got that information from this web board.

2. They don't want to have it so obvious that they may have been wrong???

3. Tech support would have nothing to do then..

russbecker · Post by **russbecker** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:05 pm

Got the alternate DVD layout method to work, first tested using 7 MPEG_2's with full chapter indices. At the moment we are creating an ISO image using all 14 VS projects pre-rendered as MPEG-2 files.

If this is the only reliable method for carrying out this basic task, and has been so for several versions, it should be the first method listed in the manual. This would have saved several hours of testing on more than one machine.

BTW, I am a Windows software developer. Citing a bug as a feature is something that Microsoft holds the patent on.

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:12 pm

Glad you got it to work.

Apparently, the manual's workflow works for most people. Just be glad there is an alternative that works because your deadline is fast approaching!

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:39 pm

Just to clear up some of the finer points raised regarding the
Suggested Workflow

For those that are interested in the previous similar thread that used to be a sticky in the VideoStudio Forum that link is still available here:
VideoStudio RECOMMENDED PROCEDURE by JC Hunter
The one major difference between the two is that Mr Hunter insisted that failing to follow his work flow would lead to disaster.

The replacement work flow makes no such claims. In fact you will realize that technically there is no reason why you cannot use a project file in the create disc module. So having accepted that statement then there is no reason for Corel to 'instruct you to create a Video first.'

Now this is where the power and usefulness of a User to user Web Board such as this comes into play. Our members have a massive combined pool of experience and we devise and develop ways to use the software more effectively than even the software company may have envisaged.
It is as a result of this combined wealth of experience that as a forum we have found that by using the suggested work flow you are less likely to encounter problems later on.

My main reason though for creating a video file first and then clearing my time line is so that I can preview the completed edited video before progressing to the next level - DVD Creation.
I hope this helps clear up any misunderstandings or misconceptions about the Suggested work flow by SJJ1805 for Video Creation

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 3:31 am

But the point that was raised is, if Corel acknowledges that an alternative workflow will fix some problems (as they apparently do, as it is on their website's support page), then why isn't that alternate workflow mentioned in the manual, instead of buried on the website.